Talk:Lusus
Custodian vs Lusus Custodian seems to have been abandoned in favour of 'Lusus', and so I'm thinking the page title should follow suit too. Anyone disagree? Alienatedduck 08:27, June 28, 2010 (UTC) Agreed. Majutsukai 09:31, June 28, 2010 (UTC) As long as it's Lusus NaturaeDrunken Lemur 16:25, June 28, 2010 (UTC) : Really? Because I don't think the full term is ever used save once in the comic. It could be a redirect, sure, but having the full term as the main title seems unnecessary. Not to mention the fact that "Lusus Naturae" has its own meaning in the real world that we don't want people confusing. Majutsukai 18:55, June 28, 2010 (UTC) I concur. --Judgericand 16:31, June 28, 2010 (UTC) Moved it to Lusus for now, as that seems to be agreed upon more than Custodian. As for Lusus vs Lusus Naturae, I don't know. But as long as the other is a redirect it doesn't matter. Alienatedduck 20:07, June 28, 2010 (UTC) Images The current layout of images are making the text sections look incredibly nasty. Does anyone have any ideas for fixing that? I tried to add some spacing during my previous edit, but apparently that got reverted. ---dky 01:51, July 2, 2010 (UTC) I think an image gallery would be a better solution here. Majutsukai 10:40, July 2, 2010 (UTC) Okay I did that, problem solved. Majutsukai 21:27, July 9, 2010 (UTC) I think that made it look worse. McAllisterFawkes 04:39, July 10, 2010 (UTC) It's no masterpiece, but it definitely looked worse before. I'm at a loss for any other solution, because the images are too large and the text too small to justify the old format. Majutsukai 11:04, July 10, 2010 (UTC) They're smaller now as part of the gallery, right? Is it possible to move them back into the main body in their current size? McAllisterFawkes 18:52, July 10, 2010 (UTC) I don't think so? They were already thumbnailed before. And the descriptions tend to only be a line or two long, so I'm not sure the images could be made small enough regardless. D: Majutsukai 18:59, July 10, 2010 (UTC) I tried just now, and unless the descriptions are made longer, the pictures are going to overflow. At the point where Tinkerbull didn't run into the next section, the picture doesn't show for me. : / Eurynome752 19:18, July 10, 2010 (UTC) Okay, this is getting a little bit ridiculous. Are we going to have the gallery, or are we going to have the overflowing side-images? We can't have both, it looks silly. Majutsukai 20:06, July 15, 2010 (UTC) I'd think that the side-images would be better... except for the fact that they do the annoying overflowing. The gallery is neater, but then the text sections have no quick reference pictures. Could we add spacing to the text sections to compensate? ---dky 16:14, July 18, 2010 (UTC) I'd have tried that by now, but I don't think wikia formatting allows it. If anyone can figure out how, that would probably be the best solution. Majutsukai 22:18, July 18, 2010 (UTC) Doesn't it support linebreaks? ---dky 23:47, July 18, 2010 (UTC) Yes, but it tends to ignore more than one at a time. That's why I hadn't tried it already. Majutsukai 00:39, July 19, 2010 (UTC) Okay, so after I spend all day working on the images on this page, because YOU deem them to be not as pretty as the previous picture you change them back. If you would like me to change the picture to fit your needs than tell me, but I did not just work on all of those pictures for nothing. They look great and I did a lot of research on them before I edited them. So don't be a prick. Loverdesang 23:25, August 13, 2010 (UTC) :Okay. Here: ::Tavros's: The wings... ::Solluxs: Looks off porportion ::Karkat's: You could have used its sprite, but otherwise I can't complain ::Kanaya's: Off color ::Terezi's: Can't really confirm the color on this. ::Vriska's: Where to begin... : Fivex 03:53, August 14, 2010 (UTC) : Then I will change those things for you. Did you ever think of just doing those few things yourself (or asking me) instead of just wiping away all my work? Twice. (There, I finished) Loverdesang, 12:45 August 14, 2010 (UTC) ::It works well. :thumbup: --dky 02:48, September 2, 2010 (UTC) Tavros' Lusus http://www.mspaintadventures.com/?s=6&p=004064 - is that tinkerbull under Tavros' wheel? Maybe that's how he passes... Sad day :'(--Judgericand 02:46, July 6, 2010 (UTC) Speaking of that page ^, did anyone notice that Tinkerbull shares its blood color with Tavros? Eurynome752 17:33, July 10, 2010 (UTC) It looks as though all of the Lusii share the blood color of their troll ward. --Nerva Magnum 18:15, August 24, 2010 (UTC) Andrew said on formspring that Aurthour could have contributed to the Aradiabot's blood supply as well as Equius which shows that their blood is compatible. I would say it is safe to assume that they all have the same exact blood. Loverdesang 18:25 August 24, 2010 (UTC) Plural Isn't the correct plural of Lusus supposed to be Lus'i', not Lus'ii'? You can only get an -ii when pluralizing a word that ends with -ius (rad'ius'/rad'ii', but cact'us'/cact'i'). Not that it mattered THAT much :D --Scaramousche 13:42, September 21, 2010 (UTC) OK, I actually made a totally wrong guess at first, but here's some research: lusus is a fourth-declension noun (http://latinviaproverbs.pbworks.com/group040), and the plural of fourth-declension nouns ending in -us is -us (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Latin_fourth_declension). Which makes the plural of lusus lusus. Sorta confusing :) Might as well leave it as lusii just for the hell of it. --Scaramousche 14:00, September 21, 2010 (UTC) I think we should change any mention of Lusii to Lusus. Just like how the words sheep, fish, and deer are both singular and plural. I took latin for 4 years, I hated it, but Scaramousche is right. It is fourth declension. We shouldn't be calling it Lusii. Loverdesang 14:04, September 21, 2010 (UTC) It looks like I've found where the misinformation may have come from, and could continue to: http://homestuck.bandcamp.com/album/alternia . Specifically, the title of track 9. Dunno if it's too weird to PM Radiation and tell him "hey man, you've got a mistake in your Latin there"... Scaramousche 13:02, September 29, 2010 (UTC) I'm sorry? what was the reason behind anonymously editing Lusus (pl) back to Lusii? Did I miss a discussion somewhere? Scaramousche 18:41, November 15, 2010 (UTC) Someone goes and does that every few weeks. Just undo it. ~Octachor n 19:09, November 15, 2010 (UTC) It's perfectly legitimate English to say "lususes", by the way. I think it would be less confusing, since newly coined words in English are virtually never given identical plurals. --DarthEinstein 12:58, December 8, 2010 (UTC) We're not discussing newly coined English words, though. We're discussing lingo for a webcomic which prides itself on curious but accurate experimental linguistics. That said, I'd advise against using barbaric formations like "horcruxes". --RomancePhilologist 13:10, December 8, 2010 (UTC) Um... since when has MSPA prided itself on "curious but accurate experimental linguistics"? What does that even mean? --DarthEinstein 02:32, December 9, 2010 (UTC) Well, for one thing, there're about a billion portmanteaus in the comics. - Jumpjet2k 05:36, December 9, 2010 (UTC) True... but how is that "accurate ... linguistics"? Portmanteaus seem to be, in fact, the height of barbarisms (Skaia = Sky (English) + Gaia (Greek)). Not to say that they're bad -- quite the opposite! But I still do not understand the objection to "Lususes". --DarthEinstein 03:55, December 10, 2010 (UTC) Accurate in the fact that Andrew seems to care a lot about sticking to the rules of the languages he blends together: we already have specibus and specibi, not "specibuses". All I'm saying is we should at least keep consistent here: if we already have substantial precedents for using correctly formed Latin plurals I feel we should stick to this rule instead of applying a double standard. Sorry if I came through as bossy, just trying to help here. :( --RomancePhilologist 09:56, December 10, 2010 (UTC) Apology accepted, and I apologize in turn if I may have also seemed a bit confrontational... but "specibus" is not even a latin word, it just looks like it. To be precise, it looks like a dative plural and a form of "species", despite the fact that the dative plural of "species" is "speciebus". So since "specibus" is already a faux-latin dative-plural-looking-thing, latin grammar has nothing to say about how to pluralize it. The only time in latin that a -us ending pluralizes into -i is in the second declension nominative, which "species" does not belong to. Given your handle, you most likely already know all this, but I'm laying it out here for everyone to see. To take this correct pluralizing to the logical extreme, the plural of Kismesis would be Kismeses and Matesprits would be pronunced "mate-spree" (from French esprit). Of course using the correct plural is sometimes cool - sylladices is an excellent example. But using "lusus" as its own plural is just confusing. If we're going to use it, at least explain it in the article, or sidestep it altogether like Andrew did (he never once gave us the plural of lusus... always "each lusus"... bluh bluh) --DarthEinstein 05:16, December 11, 2010 (UTC) Duly noted. What I meant was that it behaves like a correct singular/plural couple, even while it's obviously not a real Latin word (being, as you correctly stated, very likely an elaboration on the dative - or ablative - case). That said, lusus being an actual Latin word should probably have us pluralize it correctly at least until Andrew gives out an official version, which may very well be never. So we probably should mark it as "status: pending" for now. --RomancePhilologist 09:03, December 11, 2010 (UTC) Sort of confusing While this page exists to serve as information on all the Lusus, each troll also has a section for their respective ones, which sometimes has different information. Really confusing. ASBusinessMagnet 13:38, October 9, 2010 (UTC) Glub What is a glub version? It says that in Gl'bgolyb's section, in case you were wondering. - 66.168.217.209 : I think you should have completely read the sentence it says: ::Her name sounds like the "glub" version of the word "apocalypse", which refers to Gl'bogolyb's power to release The Vast Glub. :If on re-reading it doesn't make sense than: "Gl'bogolyb" is the "glub version" of "apocalypse". The Light6 03:58, December 31, 2011 (UTC) Transparancy I already said this on the aradia lusus file talk page. But I think it's unlikely to be noticed there. So I will repeat here: I really think it looked better without transparancy. I mean it kinda works on Aradia's Lusus, but it looks even more awkward with the lusus files that are not full body shots. I also find it visually less appealing than the solid background, I feel like that was alot easier on the eyes. Just putting that out here, might be just me.bitterLime 18:00, May 23, 2012 (UTC) :I agree about those that aren't full body shots, although they certainly aren't as bad as I expected them to be. As for solid colour blocks looking better, well, obviously I disagree there or I wouldn't have done the transparency. I am very much of the opinion that transparency basically always looks better if it's feasible to do it (there are exceptions, but they're uncommon). I would say that I dislike Goatdad the most, because it just has so much cutoff edge, but Crabdad doesn't look too bad, I'm thinking about doing Bicyclops as full body at some point. Most of the rest of the images look great, especially Eridan's and Kanaya's, whose glow borders are absolutely perfect IMO. It's hard making the glows look completely consistent when the images are all different sizes and you're doing glows in different colours. It's hard and anyone who's done similar image work will understand. :Anyway, I guess we'll see what others think. I've no problem with changing the images if the majority dislikes the new look ::Yes usually transparancy is preferable, but when it results in white on white that's kind of unpleasant. You need an outline to keep it visible, witch kind of ruins the original point of transparancy. Not only that but in this case it's also alot more exhausting for the eyes to perceive the subtle shades of white and light grey, which was imo not as straining for the eyes when there was still a solid colour background. But yeah, that's just my opinion I guess.bitterLime 11:14, May 28, 2012 (UTC) :::Well, it has an outline. The glow. Same as we have on those god tier Rose and Dave images from S Cascade, which have black glows to account for the pure white depiction of their skin and hair. As for the greyscale shades, we can always dial up the contrast a little if needs be ::::I realise the glow acts as an outline...that's not what I meant. I meant that having a glow or outline kinda defeats the initial purpose of the transparancy. Anyway, I would be fine with it really as long as we could replace sollux's and gamzee's lusus pics...especially Gamzee's. I'd still think the old version was more pleasant, but at least the full body shot problem would be solved. It doesn't bother me on crabdad much for example. But Gamzee's looks bad... Problem is we don't really have any other pictures of gamzee's lusus unless we count the one on Jake's island, which isn't literally the same, but it's the same species...so we could do that I guessbitterLime 16:18, May 28, 2012 (UTC) :::::Well, it only defeats the purpose of transparency if you're making assumptions about transparency. When I talk about images being transparent, it means they don't extend to the rectangular border of the whole thing at all points, which looks ugly due to a sheer cutoff edge. Transparency means all unnecessary parts of the image are blank. The glow is necessary, and so counts as part of the image for the purposes of the definition. :::::But yeah, I'll retrieve the full-body Bicyclops, and I'm pretty much resigned to using the Jake Goatdad Sub-section names Just thinking is this page supposed to document individual lusus or the differing types (Sort of confusing), because if we are documenting the differing types naming them all as "troll's lusus" while correct, is also wrong, being that other individuals of the same species have been seen, either as the A1 troll lusus, or as wild members of their species (the exception of course being Gl'bgolyb who there is only one of and is a member of the ). I assume the reasoning behind the current format is probably due to lack of names when the article was first being written, however now they all have names, of a sort (some are individual names others are species names), with the exception of Aradia's lusus. The Light6 (talk) 08:28, October 3, 2012 (UTC) Known names * Aradia's lusus - None. * Tavros' lusus - Individual name: Tinkerbull, potential species name: * Sollux's lusus - / Biclops dad * Karkat's lusus - Crabdad/Crab dad (note to self, update article to reflect this has been said in canon and is no longer fandom ) * Nepeta's Lusus - Individual name: Pounce de Leon, potential species name: Cat Mom * Kanaya's lusus - Virgin Mother Grub, or just Mother Grub because the virgin status refers only to the one raising Kanaya (although Kanaya's Mother Grub is apparently the only one of her kind to be a lusus, at least in A2) * Terezi's lusus - Dragon, also individual name: Pyralspite (for Redglare) * Vriska's lusus - Spidermom * Equius' lusus - Individual name: Aurthour, species name: Was one ever given? Centaur? * Gamzee's lusus - Goatdad?/Goat dad? * Eridan's lusus - Skyhorse / Seahorse dad * Feferi's lusus - Gl'bgolyb (Also given Gl'bgolyb is the lusus for all other Fuchsia bloods, in A2 at least, calling it just Feferi's lusus always seems to be downplaying Gl'bgolyb's importance IMO) - The Light6 (talk) 08:28, October 3, 2012 (UTC) :Wasn't Equius' lusus' species given a name in Humanimals? 16:31, October 3, 2012 (UTC) ::NOt sure about humanimals, but centaur was the name in homestuck. 17:10, October 3, 2012 (UTC) :::I don't remember him being called a centaur but since in one of the recap pages Huss did refer to the lusus as a humanimal, maybe humanimal would be a better species name? 18:22, October 3, 2012 (UTC) ::::I don't remember it ever being called a humanimal in homestuck, besides humanimal is less specific, and thirdly I just included a link (click "used" in my post above) to a page where it's actually called a centaur... 19:51, October 3, 2012 (UTC) :::::It was during one of Huss' recaps. :::::That is a human describing the lusi as a term he recognized, not necessarily what the species is actually called. 20:39, October 3, 2012 (UTC) Humanimal is from another comic by Hussie (Humanimals), and Hussie has made no secret that Aurthour was derived from that, and the recap calling him would've just been him acknowledging that. So really humanimals are a group of creatures, just like lusus. The Light6 (talk) 23:46, October 3, 2012 (UTC) :What really? When I read it I always just thought it was a random name for the comic, not a name for the... entirety of creatures inside the comic? 04:28, October 4, 2012 (UTC) Potential section names * Ram lusus / Sheep lusus * Fairy bulls / Fairy Bull lusus * Bicyclops / Bicyclops lusus / Biclops / Biclops lusus * Crab lusus * Cat lusus * Mother Grub / Virgin Mother Grub * Dragon lusus * Spider lusus * Centaur lusus * Goat lusus * Seahorse lusus * Gl'bgolyb Just a list of possible names which while most are not exactly canon, still fit into canon. - The Light6 (talk) 15:46, November 4, 2012 (UTC) 'Dragon Lusus Glaresplosion' So a while ago, I added a sentence saying that members of Terezi's Lusus' species can apparently cause explosions with their eyes. Here's the link to prove it: www.mspaintadventures.com/?s=6&p=... Could somebody insert it in for me? Because I can't seem to get the little hosue logo near the side to show up. :Sure, you get that by using the HS template, which shows up quite a few times on this page, and it's formatted . It only needs the page number, not the whole url. 01:16, February 19, 2016 (UTC) Hiveswap We should add the sloth and catdeer lusii to this pageDark bomber27 (talk) 02:47, September 18, 2017 (UTC)